Delhi High Court: In the long-running trade mark dispute between hospitality brands “SOCIAL HOUSE” and “SOCIAL”, a Division Bench of V. Kameswar Rao and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, JJ. referred the matter to mediation while issuing notice on an appeal filed by Vardhaman Choksi, proprietor of “SOCIAL HOUSE”, challenging the judgment that cancelled his trade mark registration.
The Court referred the parties to mediation under the aegis of the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre, after the respondents also expressed willingness to explore a settlement. The Court simultaneously issued notice in the appeal and directed the parties to file written submissions before the next date of hearing.
Delhi High Court declares “SOCIAL” a well-known trade mark
Background
The appeal has been filed by Vardhaman Choksi, proprietor of the “SOCIAL HOUSE” trade mark, challenging the Delhi High Court’s judgment dated 10 April 2026 passed in a batch of trade mark rectification proceedings. The impugned judgment directed cancellation of the registered “SOCIAL HOUSE” mark on grounds of alleged non-use, dismissed rectification petitions concerning registrations containing the mark “SOCIAL”, and made observations referring to the appellant as a “trade mark squatter”.
The dispute concerns competing rights over the “SOCIAL HOUSE” and “SOCIAL” trade marks in the hospitality sector. Vardhaman Choksi contended that the “SOCIAL HOUSE” mark was adopted and commercially used in Mumbai in 2011, including in connection with hospitality services associated with Escobar, prior to the respondent’s adoption of the “SOCIAL” mark.
He argued that the Single Judge failed to adequately consider evidence of prior adoption, bona fide commercial use, and statutory protections under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The appeal further challenges the findings on non-use under Section 47, Trade Marks Act, asserting that the rectification proceedings were initiated within the statutory 5-year period following registration and that litigation-related restraints affected the appellant’s ability to commercially exploit the mark.
He also challenged the observations describing him as a “trade mark squatter”, contending that such findings exceeded the scope of the rectification proceedings and caused significant reputational and commercial prejudice.
Bombay HC grants interim relief to “SOCIAL” restaurant against “SOCIAL TRIBE” in trade mark dispute
Decision
The parties have been directed to appear before the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre on 17 July 2026, while the appeal has been listed before the Division Bench on 21 August 2026 to report the outcome of the mediation proceedings.
[Vardhaman Choksi v Impresario Entertainment and Hospitality, LPA 480/2026 CM APPL. 41723-41727/2026, decided on 8-7-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For Appellant: Mr. J Sai Deepak, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Utsav Trivedi, Mr. Arpit Gupta, Mr.Divya Pratap Parmar, Ms. Akansha Agarwal and Mr. B Sidhi Pramodh Rayudu, Advs.
For Respondents: Senior Advocate C.M. Lall.
Buy Trade Marks Act, 1999 HERE
